Rogers Ready to Move On

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Sooo your taking an opinionated article and using their definition of "fumble recovery" as "luck"?

Nice.

Apparently you didn't read what I said, nor the article for that matter.


Act of stripping = skill

Way ball bounces = luck


The actual recovery of a fumble is pure luck. Hence, the first part of that play against the cowboys was skill, the second part resulted from luck. It's not that hard to understand.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Apparently you didn't read what I said, nor the article for that matter.


Act of stripping = skill

Way ball bounces = luck


The actual recovery of a fumble is pure luck. Hence, the first part of that play against the cowboys was skill, the second part resulted from luck. It's not that hard to understand.

Your right I must have missed something.....

the article was written by Aaron Schatz. Could you explain who he is and what makes his statement in his article fact? I'm betting you could ask a ton of other people and get a different answer each time.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by jdlea

First off, the quoted article doesn't really apply to the play where he scored. The crux of it is right here:



This article is really talking about the ability to predict who is more likely to recover a fumble based on the players involved more than saying, "when a football hits the ground, the following events are totally random and based on luck." You are correct that it was lucky the ball didn't bounce out of bounds and that it continued to roll/bounce backwards, however, picking up a bouncing football while running full speed is not easy and he did it while on his way to scoring the touchdown that ended up being the difference in that game. So, his strip and scoop were skillful, the luck came in the football going in the direction he pulled it and not taking an odd hop after hitting the ground.

You are trying hard my man, but it still comes down to how that ball bounced. It's really all luck or chance if you will. Sure, the holding onto the ball and stripping are skills, but that bounce is a huge factor in all of this. I've seen guys do the same thing, but right when they are about to snatch it up, the ball bounces in a completely different way and they miss it completely. You want to talk about skill, those two TDs (1 called back) he gave up was skill (or lack thereof). :P

Originally Posted by SBXVII

and? Carlos never got owned? Ok.

...not like that. By a bum of a QB to seal the game? ...lol

[SBXVII]

The ball bounce WAS luck. It could have gone anywhere and it just happened to land in front of him.

The stripping of the ball and picking it up more then likely skill. Otherwise OL would be playing skill positions.

[Monkeydad]

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Your right I must have missed something.....

the article was written by Aaron Schatz. Could you explain who he is and what makes his statement in his article fact? I'm betting you could ask a ton of other people and get a different answer each time.

Can you prove his article is wrong? So if a author is unknown, that makes his writings invalid? Is that your whole argument?

I'm betting if I ask a ton of people that if a recovering a bouncing ball is luck and any of them said "no", than chances are I've found a bunch of idiots.


What isn't luck is this. Stripping the ball. Fighting for the ball in a pile. Those are things that can help you out in the recovery of a ball, but it still all boils down to how that brown ball bounces.


So let's move on. Carlos sucks and so does D. Hall.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You are trying hard my man, but it still comes down to how that ball bounced. It's really all luck or chance if you will. Sure, the holding onto the ball and stripping are skills, but that bounce is a huge factor in all of this. I've seen guys do the same thing, but right when they are about to snatch it up, the ball bounces in a completely different way and they miss it completely. You want to talk about skill, those two TDs (1 called back) he gave up was skill (or lack thereof). :P

I'm not really trying hard, some of what I said is pretty much straight from the article you brought into the thread. I'm not going to continue to argue this point, I already said that I believed the ball not bouncing out of bounds had to do with luck, but you're completely ignoring plenty of other things that were involved.

Honestly, I just don't care enough to belabor a point about a guy who made one hell of an INDIVIDUAL play. I mean, really, if we're arguing that a bouncing ball is luck, technically pretty much everything is luck. Football's aren't random and that's pretty how you're presenting it.

If Carlos ever hangs onto another pick in his career I'll make sure to point how lucky he was that the ball wasn't struck by a falling blimp for about 10 pages of a thread just to piss you off.

[SmootSmack]

I'm not sure why we as fans always feel the need to put down another player when talking about one player.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Can you prove his article is wrong? So if a author is unknown, that makes his writings invalid? Is that your whole argument?

I'm betting if I ask a ton of people that if a recovering a bouncing ball is luck and any of them said "no", than chances are I've found a bunch of idiots.


What isn't luck is this. Stripping the ball. Fighting for the ball in a pile. Those are things that can help you out in the recovery of a ball, but it still all boils down to how that brown ball bounces.


So let's move on. Carlos sucks and so does D. Hall.

Picking up a bouncing ball isn't luck...having the ball bounce so that it can be picked up is luck.

I N C E P T I O N

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by jdlea

Honestly, I just don't care enough to belabor a point about a guy who made one hell of an INDIVIDUAL play. I mean, really, if we're arguing that a bouncing ball is luck, technically pretty much everything is luck. Football's aren't random and that's pretty how you're presenting it.

No, I think we both agreed. You are just putting too much priority emphasizes on the play itself when in fact the play may have never occurred had it not been for a lucky bounce. So that sole "spectacular individual play" relied on pure luck.


Here is another example of some incredible luck.




To say that "technically pretty much everything is luck" is beyond false. It does take a lot of luck (with injuries/ball bouncing/etc) to win the Super Bowl, and I've heard countless coaches even say so. Better to be lucky than not.


This goes back to what SS says about people dissing Rogers because he drops INTs. Fans only care about the ESPN highlights, and many judge a players abilities by those highlights to. I think we are done here.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not sure why we as fans always feel the need to put down another player when talking about one player.

If this is in reference to anything I've said, I'm sick and tired of people bashing Rogers, yet hail D. Hall as if he's some hero. Rogers is more consistent at the CB spot than Hall will ever be, yet he gets all the glamour because he has ONE good game, and picks up a random bouncing ball for a TD. (yet gives up the most TDs, yards, 1st downs, etc..)

I've said why I think Rogers needs to go, and it's based off of his attitude.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not sure why we as fans always feel the need to put down another player when talking about one player.

Inability to form a valid argument in their own favor.

Seriously, who can defend Carlos?

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

No, I think we both agreed. You are just putting too much priority emphasizes on the play itself when in fact the play may have never occurred had it not been for a lucky bounce. So that sole "spectacular individual play" relied on pure luck.

To say that "technically pretty much everything is luck" is beyond false. It does take a lot of luck (with injuries/ball bouncing/etc) to win the Super Bowl, and I've heard countless coaches even say so. Better to be lucky than not.


This goes back to what SS says about people dissing Rogers because he drops INTs. Fans only care about the ESPN highlights, and many judge a players abilities by those highlights to. I think we are done here.

One thing I will say: that ball probably wasn't staying in bounds forever so, he made his own luck by running it down: hustle isn't luck.

Also, I really could make the case that everything is luck, it's not beyond false. The Redskins are lucky DeAngelo Hall wasn't hurt before that game (luck, by your definition) or he would have never been there to make that play. There; now the entire play is based on the fact that Hall wasn't unlucky enough to be injured...lol

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by Monkeydad

Creating turnovers is just as vital of a role for a CB as coverage. Think of it this way, how many lost opportunities and probably games have Rogers' drops caused? In this league, you can't give opponents second chances. That's what Carlos does. The real problem is not that he drops interceptions, it's how he drops EASY interceptions that hit him in the hands, chest, facemask...a professional football player should not be doing this, that often.

It has become a liability that really detracts from his decent coverage skills.



If not for Orakpo actually getting a rare holding call, that blunder would have cost of the game.

I still remember what Cris Collinsworth said during the game, that "Carlos Rogers would be in the pro bowl every year if he could catch."

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I guess Rogers is yet another player who really doesn't get it. No one is trying to replace him. He can stay all he wants. But I'm betting he's going to ask for a mint and he's not worth it. Now if he's willing to sign another contract about the range of what he's making now then fine, but as other have said he's thinking payday and I'm guessing he might get a little humbled in the end. But that depends on the need at CB by other teams.

It's not my intention to bad-mouth the guy because he may/or may not be leaving for greener pastures. If at this point in his career he's playing the game for the money and feels he may be able to make more someplace else...go for it, just don't become a Fred Smoot clone. Rogers does think he's better than Hall.

Carlos Rogers Thinks He’s Better Than DeAngelo Hall | Yardbarker.com